General Discussion

dawg

(10,777 posts)

24. The thing is, the people would get what they voted for.

Tue Nov 4, 2014, 04:04 PM

Nov 2014

Right now, we elect Barack Obama President, but the Republicans control the House and obstruct nearly everything. Then, they run campaigns blaming the President. There is no accountability.

If Democrats wanted to bargain away individual rights in order to make deals with the Tea Party, another party would rise up to represent those of us who think that is reprehensible.

Our current system is no longer working and cannot be repaired. It was designed for statesmen who would accept the results of elections and govern accordingly. Now that the "obstruction" genie has been let out of the bottle, I see no way of putting it back in short of a Constitutional amendment.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

41 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

NYT: "Cancel the Midterms". Do you agree? [View all] Nye Bevan Nov 2014 OP

band-aid non-reform reform. Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #1

Agree... KansDem Nov 2014 #8

Two years keeps congressional representatives tuned into what their constituents want. badtoworse Nov 2014 #2

I agree- I like 2 year terms Lee-Lee Nov 2014 #3

I agree on that too. Jamastiene Nov 2014 #17

Two years keeps congressional reps in permanent campaign/fundraising mode frazzled Nov 2014 #37

Cancel the private money corrupting our elections. Orsino Nov 2014 #4

The volatility is a good thing. The last thing we need is a system designed for ossification and the Nuclear Unicorn Nov 2014 #5

How about starting with something small? DetlefK Nov 2014 #6

It's never been complicated for me goldent Nov 2014 #40

How about the NYT getting cancelled instead? hobbit709 Nov 2014 #7

Actually, I do agree Proud Public Servant Nov 2014 #9

If you 'cancel the midterms,' the 233 republican majority in the House stays in place until 2018! BP2 Nov 2014 #10

No. Arbitrary or random action in general rock Nov 2014 #11

Amend the Constitution and set the terms of Congress and President to four or six years, whichever. Spider Jerusalem Nov 2014 #12

The Tea Party would absolutely love a parliamentary system. Nye Bevan Nov 2014 #13

Do they? Spider Jerusalem Nov 2014 #14

In any parliamentary system, a small party can threaten to bring down the government, Nye Bevan Nov 2014 #20

Gridlock and very slow change were considered a feature, not a bug, in our system. branford Nov 2014 #28

A small party can threaten, they won't get anywhere Spider Jerusalem Nov 2014 #29

You need to look at places like Italy and Germany as well as the UK. Nye Bevan Nov 2014 #30

What "newly-acquired power"? Spider Jerusalem Nov 2014 #31

A party need not necessarily hold many seats to exert significant influence. branford Nov 2014 #33

The Tories won't be in government Spider Jerusalem Nov 2014 #39

A parliamentary system might be good for the Tea Party, but so what? dawg Nov 2014 #21

Yes, there would be plenty of tawdry back-room deals going on. Nye Bevan Nov 2014 #22

The thing is, the people would get what they voted for. dawg Nov 2014 #24

Interesting perspective, but somewhat skewed. branford Nov 2014 #32

If the President has to resort to repeated vetoes for the last two years of his Presidency, he ... dawg Nov 2014 #35

I think the complaints about divided government are vastly overstated, branford Nov 2014 #38

Well, it's all fun and games and checks and balances until we actually default on something. dawg Nov 2014 #41

Is NYT turning into Salon? LittleBlue Nov 2014 #15

I agree LeftInTX Nov 2014 #18

I'm not sure that it's that "wacky". Two years is a very short term for congressmen. Nye Bevan Nov 2014 #23

That is its intent LittleBlue Nov 2014 #25

Elected representatives should always be worrying about reelection. branford Nov 2014 #34

Two years is long enough. Jamastiene Nov 2014 #16

We need something more akin to a parliamentary system. dawg Nov 2014 #19

Citizen to NYT: SomethingFishy Nov 2014 #26

Are you suggesting changes to the First Amendment? nt branford Nov 2014 #36

I like the 2 yr terms. That way, I have a shot of throwing out the ones I don't like. napi21 Nov 2014 #27